On paper, Minnesota and Wisconsin seem like they would produce similar election results.

They're both upper Midwestern states with farms in the south, forests in the north and connections to the Great Lakes and the Mississippi River that drew Scandinavian and German migrants.

But Minnesota hasn't voted for a Republican presidential nominee since 1972. Its politics lean left, with Democrats controlling a trifecta in state government. Despite Donald Trump's belief he has "a really good shot" of winning Minnesota this year, Cook Political Report rated the state as "likely Democrat" until last week, when it downgraded the state to "lean Democrat."

Wisconsin, on the other hand, shocked the nation by helping elect Donald Trump in 2016. The state's politics have shifted right under an entrenched Republican majority in the state Legislature. The Badger State is a key battleground in this year's presidential race, a point emphasized by the Republican National Committee's choice of Milwaukee for its nominating convention this month.

The states have long walked a similar path, but differences in political culture, economic fortunes and voter enthusiasm are causing them to diverge.

A history of progressive politics

Jonathan Kasparek, a professor at the University of Wisconsin who has studied the state's political history, points to the early formation of the political parties in both states that set them on different paths.

In Wisconsin, the Republican Party dominated in elections until the 1950s, even as pro-labor Democrats started to build bases of power around Milwaukee and eventually Madison. Minnesota Democrats merged with the Farmer Labor Party in the 1940s to become the Democratic-Farmer-Labor Party, creating a coalition that gave DFLers a foothold in regions across the state for many decades, including in pro-labor mining towns and farm country.

"What is missing in Wisconsin and what is present in Minnesota is the farm vote," he said.

The strength of the DFL in Minnesota goes beyond history — it's become a fundraising and organizing powerhouse in elections, outraising and spending the Republican Party of Minnesota, which has been dogged by debt for more than a decade.

The Minnesota DFL Party has more than $2 million in its state campaign account as of its June report, compared to roughly $78,000 in the Republican Party's state report. Republicans outraised Democrats in Wisconsin for years until 2020, when the numbers reversed. Democrats have since dwarfed Republicans in fundraising and have a major money advantage heading into the 2024 election.

Shifting economies, political geography

Being farther north and west, Minnesota never developed the heavy industry and factories of Steel Belt states like Michigan, Ohio and Pennsylvania. Union labor made these states a reliable Democratic bloc known as the "Blue Wall" throughout the latter half of the 20th century.

The decline of manufacturing jobs transformed these states and turned their politics increasingly red. Wisconsin's manufacturing economy followed the same trajectory. In 1980, 28% of Wisconsin's jobs were in manufacturing. In 2022, it was down to 18%. Meanwhile, Minnesota managed to expand its manufacturing sector.

At the same time, family farms have been disappearing as a result of corporate consolidation, international competition and aging populations — changes that transformed farm communities into increasingly conservative strongholds.

"The farm vote and the rural vote are different. A majority of rural people are not involved in ag at all," said Kasparek. "Republicans have been able to attract those voters primarily by playing on cultural issues, pro-life, anti-elitist sentiment."

Rural areas in both states have shifted firmly to the right in the past two presidential elections, and Wisconsin has more rural voters than Minnesota. Katherine Cramer, a political science professor at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, spent years traveling to diners, gas stations and church basements in smaller towns across Wisconsin to listen to people talk about politics.

"What I was hearing in the rural communities was really different than in other places. They were feeling that, 'We're good Americans, we're working really hard and we're not getting what we deserve. We don't get the resources we deserve or the attention we deserve because all of the focus is on Madison,'" she said.

She published her book, "The Politics of Resentment," in March before the 2016 election, which saw Donald Trump capitalize on those feelings in rural America to flip critical states, including Wisconsin.

But while both states have become less agricultural, Minnesota has made up for those losses by expanding its economy and population in cities to a greater extent than Wisconsin has. The share of voters in Minnesota living in urban areas has increased at twice the rate of Wisconsin since 1980. It has also attracted more highly educated workers than Wisconsin, a voting group that once leaned Republican but now votes more Democratic.

Cramer said Wisconsin's urban areas are also different from the Twin Cities, which are surrounded by increasingly blue suburbs. Milwaukee's are still dominated by Republicans, though they are starting to trend blue, and Madison's suburbs are more purple, she said.

A turnout advantage for Minnesota

The biggest difference between the Twin Cities and Milwaukee, however, is in voter turnout. Turnout was down across Wisconsin in the 2016 election, but nowhere was lower than Milwaukee. Turnout in Milwaukee County was 89% of what it was in 2012.

Twin Cities voters turned out in 2016, helping Hillary Clinton win the state. Had Milwaukee shown up like it did in past elections, it would have been difficult for Donald Trump to win the state.

"Trump voters were more enthused, they came out and voted, while Obama voters did not come out for Clinton," said Michael Minta, a political science professor at the University of Minnesota.

Minta said because the likelihood for Democrats to win in rural areas is "relatively small," it's increasingly important to turn out their voters in urban and suburban areas — including voters of color who might not be as excited about the candidates this cycle.

Wisconsin's population is slightly whiter than Minnesota's, but some polling suggests that the voting dynamics within demographics could be shifting: Biden has an edge for older, white voters, while Trump is seeing gains in support among communities of color.

Higher voter turnout has historically helped Democrats in elections — and Minnesota routinely bests Wisconsin in voter turnout. Minta pointed to Minnesota's less restrictive voter laws compared to Wisconsin as a factor.

Minnesota opened up early voting options and changed a law last year that will allow felons to vote upon release from incarceration.

In 2011, Wisconsin passed a law requiring a photo ID to vote, and Republican majorities there passed redistricting maps that helped ensure future GOP power in the Legislature.

Those maps were recently struck down by the Wisconsin Supreme Court, but they've contributed to the perception of Wisconsin as a swing state and eventually became a campaign issue that could have motivated more voters to turn out, said Kasparek.

"There's a sense that because voters are fairly swingy and independent minded, the idea that one party had essentially rigged the game in their favor offended a lot of people," he said. "That was something that even Republican candidates had a hard time defending."

Jake Steinberg is a graphics producer at the Minnesota Star Tribune focusing on cartography and visual storytelling.

Briana Bierschbach is a politics and government reporter for the Star Tribune.